Comments on: Filling judicial vacancies to protect the progressive legacyhttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/
Tue, 03 Mar 2015 20:29:09 +0000hourly1http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.3By: EconCassandrahttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83368
Sat, 18 Jan 2014 18:39:42 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83368The present system of “filling judicial vacancies” IS the problem, primarily because it protects the wealthy class “patronage” system that is destroying this nation.
]]>By: Gilad724http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83296
Thu, 16 Jan 2014 09:40:25 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83296I am open to criticizing an Op-Ed piece as being overly leftist/liberal or rightest/conservative. Also have no problem if someone wants to state that in their opinion either set of ideologies is damaging to the country. But know the line between opinion and fact. Saying: ‘ “progressivism” is …and antithetical to our founding principles’ is absolute nonsense! The Constitution and the Bill of Rights are direct consequences of the “Age of Enlightenment”. Our “founding principles” are something concrete and well defined. If more people actual took to reading and understand them, rather than just use the phrase as hyperbole, we would all be much better off.
]]>By: Isomehttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83295
Thu, 16 Jan 2014 04:12:22 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83295Stack the courts with Marxist-Lenists types and socialists.
]]>By: edgyinchinahttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83291
Thu, 16 Jan 2014 02:17:43 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83291What good would be served by filling the vacancies, if they are only filled with judges who support more spying on the American people. Authorizing the NSA to listen in a innocent American phone calls, and read all our emails… And don’t say it’s only meta-data, unless you’re going to show ‘beyond a shadow of a doubt’ evidence that this is true…. You won’t, because you can’t. That’s the way secrecy works. That’s the excuse every despot in the history of this planet has used to put people in chains….
]]>By: BlueInBamahttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83277
Wed, 15 Jan 2014 17:02:10 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83277@stephen thomas and jinglz – I find it interesting that Republicans don’t see the government telling people who they can marry, what women can and cannot do with their own bodies, what substances people can use of their own free will, and their insistence that the United States is a “Christian” nation as infringing on the Constitution in the slightest. And yet Obama’s attempt at providing universal health coverage by resurrecting a Republican plan first proposed by Newt Gingrich makes him a “far-left zealot” (your words) who is trouncing all over the constitution.

What a tiny little world your mind occupies.

]]>By: Nerauhttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83234
Wed, 15 Jan 2014 00:17:10 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83234Interesting that so-called conservative justices ended up deciding in Citizens United, with respect to free speech, that corporations are people. These days, conservative justices are the ones who are radical.

Let’s face it, Conservatism is a bowel disease.

]]>By: jinglzhttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83224
Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:58:14 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83224This entire article is Liberal hog-wash, starting with the statement, “Though neither President Bill Clinton nor Obama demonstrated any interest in tilting the bench to the left — they sent up mostly moderate nominees…”

Are you kidding? Neither Kagan nor Sotomayor could find a copy of the U.S. Constitution if you pasted it on their backsides. They have unfailingly leg-humped Barak Obama at every turn. These two Obama appointees are as far left as any justices that have ever worn the black robe. And the reason for the nuclear option? Because Obama’s remaining nominees are also far-left zealots–tho whom the Constitution is either a “living document”, a mere suggestion–or is not worth following at all. Puh-lease Reuters…get a grip.

]]>By: ltcrunchhttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83223
Tue, 14 Jan 2014 18:40:01 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83223“Yet, because of Republican delaying tactics, Democrats still have only 50.5 percent of the total judges.”

]]>By: BlueInBamahttp://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/2014/01/13/filling-judicial-vacancies-to-protect-the-progressive-legacy/#comment-83214
Tue, 14 Jan 2014 16:25:29 +0000http://blogs.reuters.com/great-debate/?p=27293#comment-83214Wow. I guess all the brilliant posters above missed that part in the article where the benches are already packed WITH CONSERVATIVE JUDGES. Ah, reading comprehension. Never was a strong point with today’s Republican voters
]]>